Australian Bureau of Statistics

Rate the ABS website
ABS Home > Statistics > By Release Date
4513.0 - Criminal Courts, Australia, 2005-06  
Previous ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 28/03/2007   
   Page tools: Print Print Page Print all pages in this productPrint All RSS Feed RSS Bookmark and Share Search this Product

EXPLANATORY NOTES


INTRODUCTION

1 This publication presents information relating to the criminal jurisdiction of the Higher (Supreme and Intermediate) and Magistrates' Courts in each state and territory and the Children's Courts for all states and territories except New South Wales (NSW). The criminal jurisdiction of the courts includes the trial and sentencing of persons and organisations charged with criminal offences. This information is sourced from the national Criminal Courts collection produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) with the cooperation of the states and territories.


2 The aim of the Criminal Courts collection is to provide comparable statistics for the states and territories and for Australia on the characteristics of defendants dealt with by the Criminal Courts. This includes information on the offences and sentences associated with those defendants. Refer to paragraph 45 of the Explanatory Notes for further information.


3 In order to ensure consistency between the states and territories, the statistics have been compiled according to national standards and classifications.


4 Due to differing scope and counting rules the data in this publication may not be comparable to data published in other national and state/territory publications.


5 Given the high degree of conceptual complexity in the operation of the courts systems in Australia, and the variation in the capacity of the states and territories to supply statistical information, this publication presents results from several development stages of this collection. Information relating to criminal cases heard in the Supreme and Intermediate Courts has been available since the mid 1990's. Information about defendants finalised in the Magistrates' Courts and their characteristics, including offences and sentences for defendants who were finalised by adjudication is available from 2003-04 onwards. Information about defendants finalised in the Children's Courts and their characteristics, including offences and sentences for adjudicated defendants is available as experimental data from 2004-05 (Refer Appendix 1).



DATA SOURCE

6 National statistics are derived from data about each defendant provided to the ABS by the state and territory agencies responsible for courts administration. This includes defendants processed in the Higher, Magistrates' and Children's Courts. The ABS receives data directly from these agencies in all states and territories except for Queensland (where data are supplied via the Office of Economic and Statistical Research), and New South Wales (where data are supplied via the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research).


7 Standardisation of data requires the states and territories to provide data coded according to national classifications and standards. For more information refer to paragraphs 22-23 of the Explanatory Notes.


8 For states and territories, other than Victoria, data on offences and sentences were obtained from the same source that supplied data on defendants. For Victoria, the offence and sentence data for adjudicated defendants in the Higher Courts were derived from two sources. For defendants with offences proven guilty, the offence and sentence information was derived from the Higher Courts sentencing database. These data were matched to the defendant records obtained from the primary source (courts listing system) for Victorian data. There was incomplete coverage of defendants proven guilty in the Victorian Higher Courts sentencing database, and therefore offence details for some defendants were unavailable.



SCOPE

Higher Courts

9 The Higher Courts collection includes defendants finalised in the original jurisdiction (see Glossary) of the Supreme and Intermediate Courts in Australia during the reference period 1 July 2005-30 June 2006. Children treated as adults by the courts are included in the collection.


Magistrates' Courts

10 The Magistrates' Courts collection includes defendants finalised in the criminal jurisdiction of the Magistrates' Courts. Children treated as adults by the courts are included in the collection.


11 These data include defendants finalised in the Magistrates' Courts for all states and territories except New South Wales where finalised appearances were provided instead of finalised defendants. Therefore, where charges were finalised at different court appearances in the same case for a defendant in New South Wales, these were counted as finalised defendants at each appearance rather than being aggregated as a single finalised defendant at the latest charge finalisation date.


Children's Courts

12 Data on defendants finalised in the criminal jurisdiction of the Children's Courts are included in this publication. However, due to coverage and other data quality issues they have been labelled as 'experimental' in this issue (see paragraphs 59-60). These data include all defendants finalised in the Children's Courts for all states and territories except New South Wales.


13 Data on defendants finalised in the Children's Courts in New South Wales were not able to be extracted for inclusion in this issue of the publication. Hence, an Australian total is currently unavailable for Children's Courts.


14 In all states and territories, children aged under the age of 10 years cannot be charged with a criminal offence. The maximum age that defendants are considered a child or juvenile is under the age of 18 years in all states and territories, except Queensland. In Queensland defendants are considered adults if aged 17 years and over at the time the offence was committed.


15 One of the main objectives of juvenile justice is to divert young people away from the more formal justice system through diversion schemes and conference programs. Depending on the state/territory, diversionary programs can be initiated by Police and other agencies (pre-court) and/or by the Children's Courts as part of the court process. The availability of programs varies in each state and territory, which may impact on the population and characteristics of defendants included in the Children's Courts. The types of pre-court programs include (but are not limited to): Warnings, Cautions, Police Drug Diversions and Conferencing.


16 There are different juvenile diversionary programs used once a defendant has a case initiated in the courts, depending on the state or territory. The types of court initiated programs available include:

  • Victoria - Group Conference, Ropes Program
  • Queensland - Youth Justice Conferencing, Illicit Drug Court Diversion Program
  • South Australia - Family conferences, Youth CARDS (Court Assessment Referral Drug Scheme)
  • Western Australia - Juvenile Justice Teams, Drug Court
  • Tasmania - Court Ordered Community Conference
  • Australian Capital Territory - Restorative Justice.

17 A number of court programs relate to the transfer of defendants to Drug and other specialist courts (these defendants are finalised in the Children's Courts at the time of transfer), and those court programs where the defendant returns to the Children's Court upon completion of the program. Generally, the latter are grouped into two types of programs, 'pre-adjudication' (initiated prior to hearing the facts of a case) and 'post-adjudication' (initiated once the defendant is found guilty or the defendant has entered a plea of guilty, but prior to sentence). In addition, there are also the court programs where a referral is used as a sentencing outcome. Children's criminal courts data may be impacted to varying degrees depending on whether pre or post adjudicated programs are in place.


Exclusions

18 The Higher, Magistrates' and Children's Courts data exclude cases heard in the criminal jurisdiction of the courts which do not require the adjudication of charges (e.g. bail reviews and applications to amend sentences or penalties). Also excluded are breach of bond cases, appeal cases, tribunal matters and defendants for whom a bench warrant is issued but not executed.


19 The Magistrates' Court data exclude defendants finalised in the Children's Courts, Drug Courts, Electronic Courts, Fine Recovery Units, Family Violence Courts and Indigenous Courts.



REFERENCE PERIOD

20 The statistics in this collection relate to defendants who had criminal cases finalised within the Higher, Magistrates' and Children's Courts during the reference period 1 July 2005-30 June 2006.



COUNTING UNIT

21 The principal counting unit for the Criminal Courts collection is a defendant. A defendant is a person or organisation against whom one or more criminal charges have been laid and which are heard together as the one unit of work by a court at a particular level. It should be noted that the Criminal Courts collection does not enumerate unique persons or organisations. If a person or organisation is a defendant in a number of criminal cases finalised within the courts during the reference period, this person or organisation will be counted more than once within that reference period.



CLASSIFICATIONS

22 The main national classifications used to collect and produce data on defendants in the Criminal Courts are:

  • Method of Finalisation (see Appendix 2)
  • Australian Standard Offence Classification (ASOC) (refer to paragraphs 24-25 of the Explanatory Notes and Appendix 3)
  • National Offence Index (NOI) (refer to paragraphs 26-28 of the Explanatory Notes and Appendix 4)
  • Sentence Type (refer to paragraph 44 of the Explanatory Notes and Appendix 5).

23 The classifications provide a framework for classifying criminal court information for statistical purposes, promoting data that are compiled on a consistent basis across states and territories. The classifications allow for different levels of detail to be recorded depending on the level of detail in the source information. Associated with each classification are coding rules which ensure that the counting of information is consistent across states and territories.


Australian Standard Offence Classification (ASOC)

24 The ASOC was developed by the ABS for use in the collection and publication of crime and justice statistics. It provides a uniform national classificatory framework for the compilation and comparison of statistics on offences across Australia.


25 Offence data have been coded to the ASOC on the basis of mappings of state/territory legislative codes undertaken by various agencies within those states and territories. The ABS has not undertaken any systematic checks to assess the quality of the ASOC coding for the charges adjudicated in the Criminal Courts. Amendments to the ASOC codes have only been made in very limited cases where erroneous codes were identified as part of the edit checks applied to the final data.


National Offence Index (NOI)

26 The National Offence Index (see Appendix 4) is a ranking of all ASOC Groups and selected supplementary ASOC codes (ASOC Divisions and/or ASOC Subdivisions). This ranking is based on the concept of seriousness, with a ranking of 1 relating to the ASOC code containing the most serious offence. In developing this Index, the ranking of offences was analysed using the 2000-01 Higher Courts data. The results indicated that the Index produced principal offence output that aligned with that produced using the 2000-01 principal offence rules which were based on actual sentences handed down in the Higher Courts in the 2000-01 reference period. In addition, the Index resulted in significant data quality improvements with the proportion of adjudicated defendants for whom a principal offence was unable to be determined reducing from a national average of 17% in 2000-01 to 3% in 2001-02 using the Index.


27 The assumptions and rules underpinning the NOI, in particular defining 'offence seriousness' and the impact of this definition on the ranking of offences, need to be considered when using the principal offence data in this publication. However, it is important to note that these technical issues are only of practical significance where a choice must be made between output categories (see paragraph 28). For example, although some sexual assault and related offences are ranked ahead of illicit drug and related offences, they are unlikely to co-occur. For further information regarding the development of the NOI please refer to Appendix 5 in Criminal Courts, Australia, 2001-02 (cat. no. 4513.0).


28 The principal offence for each adjudicated defendant (i.e. acquitted or proven guilty) is aggregated and published at the ASOC Division level for selected tables, and at the more detailed ASOC Subdivision or Group level (including the ASOC Group of breach of domestic violence orders) for other tables.



NATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS DATA DICTIONARY

29 A data dictionary is an agreed set of classifications and standards that is accepted as the authoritative source for a particular area of statistics. The National Criminal Courts Data Dictionary, 2005 (4527.0) has been developed by the National Criminal Courts Statistics Unit (NCCSU) of the ABS in collaboration with key stakeholders. It is a reference document which defines national data items and outlines methods for the use of 27 data elements and concepts that underpin the ABS and Council of Australian Governments (COAG) criminal courts collections. The data dictionary relates to the Higher and Magistrates' Criminal Courts. The National Criminal Courts Data Dictionary can be accessed in the Statistical References section of the National Statistical Service web site <http://www.nss.gov.au>.



COUNTING METHODOLOGY

Method of finalisation

30 Method of finalisation describes how a criminal charge is concluded by a criminal court level. For the purposes of the Criminal Courts collection, one method of finalisation is applied to each defendant within the Higher, Magistrates' and Children's Courts.


31 Prior to 2002-03, a bench warrant issued was considered a method of finalisation. From the 2002-03 reference period, this is no longer considered a method of finalisation for a defendant in the Higher Courts. This is treated as a continuation of a defendants case and will impact the duration of a defendants case i.e. time elapsed from date of initiation to date of finalisation. This aligns with the Magistrates' Courts and Children's Courts collections which do not include a bench warrant issued as a method of finalisation. Once a bench warrant has been executed and the outstanding (and new) charges have been determined, the defendant is regarded as being finalised (by a method of finalisation other than a bench warrant being issued) and is included in data for the relevant reference period in which the defendant is finalised.


32 Defendants who are referred to a Mental Health Review Tribunal (e.g. for determination of fitness for trial) are not considered to be finalised.


Transfer between Higher Court levels

33 Defendants who transfer from one Higher Court level to another are considered as initiated only once (in the level they first entered) and finalised only once (from the level they finally left).


Transfer between Magistrates' and Higher Court levels

34 Defendants who transfer from the Magistrates' Court level to the Higher Court level are considered as initiated twice (once in each of these levels) and finalised twice (once in each level). Defendants may have some charges finalised in the Magistrates' Courts whilst other charges are committed to the Higher Courts. A defendant in this situation would be counted in the Magistrates' Courts data and the Higher Courts data.


Transfers between the Children's Courts and the Magistrates' or Higher Courts

35 Defendants who transfer between the Children's Courts and the Magistrates' or Higher Courts are considered to be initiated and finalised in each court level where they appear.


Higher Courts

36 Where a defendant finalised in a Higher Court has multiple charges and these have different methods of finalisation, the defendant method of finalisation code is determined by the following order of precedence:

  • defendant deceased
  • unfit to plead
  • not guilty by reason of mental illness/condition
  • guilty finding by court
  • charge proven n.f.d.
  • guilty plea by defendant
  • acquitted by court
  • charge unproven n.f.d.
  • charge unproven n.e.c.
  • transfer from a Higher Court to a Magistrates' Court
  • other transfer between court levels n.e.c.
  • withdrawn by the prosecution
  • other non-adjudicated finalisation n.e.c.
  • unknown/not stated.

Magistrates' Courts

37 Where a defendant finalised in a Magistrates' Court has multiple charges and these have different methods of finalisation, the defendant method of finalisation code is determined by the following order of precedence:
  • defendant deceased
  • unfit to plead
  • not guilty by reason of mental illness/condition
  • guilty finding by court
  • charge proven n.f.d.
  • guilty plea by defendant
  • guilty ex-parte
  • acquitted by court
  • charge unproven n.f.d.
  • no case to answer at committal
  • charge unproven n.e.c.
  • committed for trial
  • transfer from a Magistrates' Court to a Higher Court n.f.d.
  • committed for sentence
  • transfer from a Magistrates' Court to a Higher Court n.e.c.
  • other transfer between court levels n.e.c.
  • withdrawn by the prosecution
  • other non-adjudicated finalisation n.e.c.
  • unknown/not stated.

Children's Courts

38 Where a defendant finalised in a Children's Court has multiple charges and these have different methods of finalisation, the defendant method of finalisation code is determined by the following order of precedence:
  • defendant deceased
  • unfit to plead
  • not guilty by reason of mental illness/condition
  • guilty finding by court
  • charge proven n.f.d.
  • guilty plea by defendant
  • guilty ex-parte
  • acquitted by court
  • charge unproven n.f.d.
  • no case to answer at committal
  • charge unproven n.e.c.
  • committed for trial
  • transfer from a Children's Court to a Higher court n.f.d.
  • committed for sentence
  • transfer from a Children's Court to a Higher court n.e.c.
  • transfer from a Children's Court to a Magistrates' Court
  • other transfer between court levels n.e.c
  • withdrawn by the prosecution
  • other non-adjudicated finalisation n.e.c.
  • unknown/not stated.

Merging counting units

39 Where a person or organisation is a defendant in more than one case, and their cases are finalised on the same date, in the same court level and in the same court location, their defendant records will be merged and counted as a single defendant record. This merging rule is used for defendants finalised in the Higher, Magistrates' and Children's Courts.


Principal offence adjudicated

40 Principal offence is only calculated for adjudicated defendants. Charges considered for the purpose of determining the principal offence are only those charges that have an adjudicated method of finalisation (i.e. where the defendant has pleaded guilty or the court has made a decision as to whether or not the defendant is guilty). Thus, charges that have been transferred to another level of court, together with those that are withdrawn or dealt with by some other non-adjudicated method, are not considered for the purposes of determining the principal offence adjudicated.


41 For a defendant who has a method of finalisation of proven guilty (resulting from a guilty verdict, guilty plea or guilty ex-parte), the principal offence is selected from the charge(s) proven guilty (i.e. acquitted charges are not considered). For a defendant who has a method of finalisation of acquitted, the principal offence is selected from the charge(s) acquitted.


42 Where a defendant has a single proven guilty or acquitted charge, the principal offence is the relevant ASOC code (see paragraphs 24-25) associated with the adjudicated charge.


43 Where a defendant has a method of finalisation of proven guilty with multiple charges proven guilty, or where a defendant has a method of finalisation of acquitted with multiple charges acquitted, the principal offence is selected by applying the National Offence Index (see paragraph 26). The principal offence is determined as the adjudicated charge with the highest ranked ASOC Group in the Index. Where the defendant has an adjudicated charge but is unable to receive an Index ranking (due to missing offence information or the offence mapped to an ASOC code that is not included in the Index) the principal offence is coded to 'not able to be determined'.


Principal sentence

44 Within this publication, defendants who are proven guilty have sentence information reported against them at the defendant level. This is usually, though not necessarily, the sentence associated with the principal offence. A defendant can receive a single sentence for a single offence proven guilty, a single sentence for multiple offences proven guilty, multiple sentences for multiple offences proven guilty and/or multiple sentences assigned to the one offence proven guilty. Where a defendant has multiple sentences, the principal sentence is selected by applying the hierarchy of the Sentence Type Classification (see Appendix 5).



DATA COMPARABILITY

45 The Criminal Courts collection has been designed to facilitate comparisons over time and across states and territories through the application of common national statistical standards. However, some legislative and processing differences may limit the degree to which the statistics are comparable across the states and territories. Differences may also arise as a result of other factors, including refinements in data quality procedures and modifications in the systems used to obtain and compile the figures.



REVISIONS

46 Queensland and Northern Territory's 2004-05 data have been revised. Caution should be taken when making historical comparisons of these data (see paragraphs 48-52 and 56).



SIGNIFICANT EVENTS

Victoria

47 During 2005-06 the Victorian Department of Justice identified errors in data provided to the ABS in 2004-05, resulting in changes to some national counting rules. These changes caused some minor movements in the principal offence data item in the 2005-06 data and therefore historical comparisons should be made with caution. In particular, abduction and related offences are overcounted in data prior to 2005-06.


Queensland

48 During 2004-05 Queensland's finalised defendant populations for the Children's, Magistrates' and Higher Criminal Courts were undercounted. This small undercount occurred due to an internal business process that resulted in a lag in the verification of finalised defendant records included in data supplied for the ABS publication. Revised 2004-05 data for Queensland has been included in this publication. It is likely that data published prior to 2004-05 for Queensland also contains an undercount. The size of undercount in prior years is unknown. As a result, caution should be taken when making historical comparisons with 2004-05 and 2005-06 data.


49 Due to a change in practice in the recording of court records by police, there has been a change in how 'assault police' and 'resist/hinder police' offences are recorded in the 2004-05 revised and 2005-06 Magistrates' Criminal Court data for Queensland. Where a defendant was adjudicated after February 2005 for either an assault police offence or a resist or hinder police officer offence, the offence level ASOC code for these offences was not able to be separated and, therefore, both these two offences were coded to ASOC group 1522 (resist or hinder police officer or justice official). Assault police should be recorded in ASOC division 2. This has resulted in a slight undercount of defendants with offences coded to ASOC division 2 and a slight overcount in ASOC division 15 for Queensland 2004-05 revised data.


50 During 2005-06, the Queensland Office of Economic Statistics and Research undertook a review of local processes used to compile data for the ABS. As a result, changes were made to some counting rules and local offence code mappings to the ASOC. These changes were applied to Queensland's 2004-05 data resulting in revisions for this period. Historical comparisons should be made with caution, particularly for principal offence.


51 For Queensland Higher Criminal Courts, from July 2004 to February 2005, suspended sentences from Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton and Brisbane were incorrectly categorised as imprisonment orders leading to imprisonment with determined term being overstated and fully suspended sentences being understated.


52 For Queensland Magistrates' Criminal Courts, prior to January 2005, some suspended sentences were incorrectly categorised as imprisonment orders leading to imprisonment with determined term being overstated and fully suspended sentences being understated.


South Australia

53 For the 2005-06 data, court costs/levies have been excluded as a sentence type for South Australia. Prior to 2005-06, court costs/levies had been incorrectly included as a sentence type. The removal of these has resulted in a decrease in defendants with a principal sentence of 'other monetary orders n.e.c' and subsequent increases in some other non-custodial sentence categories for South Australia.


Western Australia

54 During 2004, legislative changes were implemented in Western Australia that impacted on the number and types of offences that could be adjudicated in the Magistrates' Court. These changes have resulted in an increase in the number of defendants finalised in the Magistrates' Courts in Western Australia and decreased the number of defendants transferred to the higher courts.


Tasmania

55 During 2005-06, the Tasmanian Department of Justice discovered two discrepancies in the application of national counting rules to their Magistrates' and Children's Court data. Firstly, data prior to 2005-06 contains a slight overcount of finalised defendants for the Magistrates' and Children's Criminal Court. This was corrected for the 2005-06 data. Secondly, the 2005-06 and historical data contain a small number of non-original matters included in the finalised defendant counts.


Northern Territory

56 During the 2005-06 cycle, the Northern Territory Department of Justice identified errors in data provided to the ABS in 2004-05. As a result, changes were made to some counting rules and local offence code mappings to the ASOC. These changes were applied to Northern Territory 2004-05 data resulting in revisions for this period. Historical comparisons should be made with caution.


Australian Capital Territory

57 There is a significant increase in finalised defendants in the Australian Capital Territory Magistrates' Criminal Court 2005-06 data due to two main factors: a large number of old defendant records in the Magistrates' Criminal Court were finalised; and a state election during the reference period resulted in an large number of defendants being adjudicated for failure to vote offences.



CONFIDENTIALITY OF TABULAR DATA

58 Table cells containing small values have been randomly adjusted to avoid releasing confidential information.



EXPERIMENTAL DATA

59 The Children's Criminal Court data included in this issue have not been subjected to the same type of validation processes that are applied to the other data presented in this publication and are therefore labelled as 'experimental'.


60 It is anticipated that New South Wales will provide data for the 2006-07 reference period which will facilitate a national Children's Court dataset for the 2006-07 publication.



RELATED PUBLICATIONS

ABS publications

61 ABS publications which may be of interest include:

      Australian Social Trends (cat. no. 4102.0) - issued annually
      Australian Standard Offence Classification (cat. no. 1234.0) - irregular
      Corrective Services, Australia (cat. no. 4512.0) - issued quarterly
      Crime and Safety, Australia (cat. no. 4509.0) - released 26 April 2006
      Crime and Safety, New South Wales (cat. no. 4509.1) - irregular
      General Social Survey: Summary Results, Australia (cat. no. 4159.0) - irregular
      Information Paper: Measuring Crime Victimisation, Australia: The Impact of Different Collection Methodologies (cat. no. 4522.0.55.001) - single issue
      Information Paper: National Information Development Plan for Crime and Justice Statistics 2005 (cat. no. 4520.0) - single issue
      Measuring Wellbeing: Frameworks for Australian Social Statistics (cat. no. 4160.0) - irregular
      Measures of Australia's Progress (cat. no. 1370.0) - issued annually
      National Criminal Courts Data Dictionary (cat. no. 4527.0) - released 28 October 2005
      Personal Safety Survey (cat. no. 4906.0) - released 21 August 2006
      Prisoners in Australia (cat. no. 4517.0) - issued annually
      Recorded Crime - Victims, Australia (cat. no. 4510.0) - issued annually
      Year Book Australia (cat. no. 1301.0) - issued annually

62 Current publications and other products released by the ABS are listed in the Catalogue of Publications and Products (cat. no. 1101.0). The Catalogue is available from the ABS web site. The ABS also issues a daily Release Advice on the web site which details products to be released in the week ahead. The National Centre for Crime and Justice Statistics releases a biannual newsletter that is published on the ABS web site. The Centre can be contacted by email through <crime.justice@abs.gov.au>.


Non-ABS publications

63 Non-ABS sources of criminal court statistics which may be of interest include:

      Australian Capital Territory Department of Justice and Community Safety, Annual Report
      Australian Institute of Criminology, List of Publications <http://www.aic.gov.au>
      Chief Justice of Western Australia, Annual Review of Western Australian Courts
      Crime Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Crime and Justice Statistics for Western Australia
      Children's Court of Queensland, Annual Report
      Children's Court of Victoria, Annual Report
      County Court of Victoria, Annual Report
      Department of Justice, Northern Territory, Annual Report
      Department of Justice, Victoria, Annual Report
      Department of the Attorney General, Western Australia, Annual Report
      Department of Justice and Attorney-General, Queensland, Annual Report
      Department of Justice and Industrial Relations, Tasmania, Department of Justice Annual Report
      Director of Public Prosecutions, Annual Report, all State, Territory and Commonwealth Offices of the Director of Public Prosecutions
      District Court of Queensland, Annual Report
      District Court of Western Australia, Annual Report
      Local Court of New South Wales, Annual Review
      Magistrates' Court, Tasmania, Annual Report
      Magistrates' Court of Queensland, Annual Report
      Magistrates' Court of Victoria, Annual Report
      NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, New South Wales Criminal Courts Statistics
      Office of Crime Statistics and Research, South Australia, Crime and Justice in South Australia Adult Courts and Corrections
      Office of Crime Statistics and Research, South Australia, Crime and Justice in South Australia Juvenile Justice
      Office of Crime Statistics and Research, South Australia, Juvenile Justice in South Australia: A 2004 Update
      Office of Economic and Statistical Research, Crime and Justice Statistics Queensland
      Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, Report on Government Services
      South Australia Courts Administration Authority, Annual Report
      Supreme Court of Queensland, Annual Report
      Supreme Court of Victoria, Annual Report
      Supreme Court of Tasmania, Annual Report
      Victoria Police, Crime Statistics

Bookmark and Share. Opens in a new window

Commonwealth of Australia 2014

Unless otherwise noted, content on this website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia Licence together with any terms, conditions and exclusions as set out in the website Copyright notice. For permission to do anything beyond the scope of this licence and copyright terms contact us.